Prevalence of Different Head-Neck Positions in Horses Shown at Dressage Competitions and Their Relation to Conflict Behaviour and Performance Marks

Abstract

Much controversy exists among riders, and in particular among those practicing dressage, regarding what can be considered an “appropriate” Head-Neck-Position (HNP). The objective was to assess the prevalence of different HNPs in the field, the behavioural reactions of horses during warm-up and competition rides in relation to HNP and the relation between HNP and marks achieved in the competition. Horses (n = 171) were selected during dressage competitions according to their HNP (3 categories based on the degree of flexion), and their behaviour was recorded during 3 minutes each of riding in the warm-up area and in the competition. Scans were carried out on an additional 355 horses every 15 minutes to determine the proportion of each HNP in the warm-up area. Sixty-nine percent of the 355 horses were ridden with their nasal planes behind the vertical in the warm-up area, 19% were ridden at or behind the vertical and only 12% were ridden with their nasal plane in front of the vertical. Horses carrying their nasal plane behind the vertical exhibited significantly (P<0.0001) more conflict behaviours than horses with their nose held in front of the vertical. Horses were commonly presented with a less flexed HNP during competition compared to warm-up (P<0.05). A HNP behind the vertical was penalised with lower marks in the lower (P = 0.0434) but not in the higher (P = 0.9629) competition levels. Horses in higher classes showed more (P = 0.0015) conflict behaviour than those in lower classes. In conclusion, dressage horses are commonly ridden during warm-up for competitions with their nasal plane behind the vertical, and this posture seems to cause significantly more conflict behaviour than HNPs in front of the vertical.

The Pattern of Superficial Body Temperatures in Leisure Horses Lunged with Commonly Used Lunging Aids

“…The natural head and neck position (HNP) is typical for horses without any load. The freely running horse lowers the head/neck base and relaxes the muscles with open head/neck angle (HNA) [1], whereas in saddle use, HNA often remains closed [2]. In the training of horses, special lunging aids (LAs) are applied in order to regulate HNP during exercise without the intervention of a rider [3,4].…”

Indicators of stress in equitation

“…behaviour indicative of conflict between the horse's interests and the rider's aids. These behaviour patterns include a variety of unwanted changes in locomotory behaviour such as bolting, rushing, running away, jogging, jibbing, napping, baulking, refusing, shying, spinning, freezing, bucking, rearing and bridle lameness (see McGreevy and McLean, (2010) for detailed explanations and functional interpretations) as well as behaviour patterns directly related to the rider's interaction with the horse such as head-tossing or reefing the reins (von Borstel et al, 2009;von Borstel et al, 2011;König von Borstel and Glißman, 2014), mouth-opening and tail-swishing (VanderHorst et al, 2013;Kienapfel et al, 2014;Górecka-Bruzda et al, 2015). Defaecation as a result of the effects the activation of the HPA-axis has on the digestive system, may also be observed (e.g.…”

“… Different degrees of poll flexion (the frequency of conflict behaviour increases, when horses are trained in more rather than less flexed head and neck postures; (von Borstel et al, 2009;Kienapfel, 2011;Christensen et al, 2014;Kienapfel et al, 2014;Smiet et al, 2014)  Different ways of rider behaviour or interaction with the horse (von Borstel, 2008;Egenvall et al, 2012)  Different types of riders / riding sessions (no significant differences in frequencies of conflict behaviour were seen in horses ridden either by recreational riders, physiologically handicapped riders, psychologically handicapped riders or special education children, but higher frequencies of conflict behaviour were seen when the horses were ridden by at-risk children (Kaiser et al, 2006)  Different types of tack such as bitted versus bitless bridles (Quick and Warren-Smith, 2009) or martingales (Heleski et al, 2009) However, it is important to note, that not necessarily all stress-inducing situations are expected to lead to increased levels of conflict behaviour. Under certain circumstances, if training methods are aversive with limited possibilities for the horse to control the situation, learned helplessness may be induced (Hall et al, 2008).…”

The role of the ethogram in equitation science

“…In this sport, the FEI rules for dressage events provide descriptions of behaviour that should be aspired to and that form the basis of performance assessment (Fédération Equestre Internationale, 2009). The debate that ensued surrounding the welfare implications of training horses in a way that involved hyperflexion of the head and neck (Rollkür) resulted in a number of studies that aimed to investigate the impact that this form of training had on the horse (for example, von Borstel et al, 2009;Zebisch et al, 2013;Kienapfel et al, 2014). Current ridden horse ethograms consequently often include details of head and neck position, in addition to other behavioural events associated with ear, mouth and tail movements.…”

“…The dressage horses only consistently exhibited tail swishing and that most frequently during canter pirouette to the left, least frequently during the extended walk(Górecka-Bruzda et al, 2015). The impact of head / neck position on the exhibition of conflict behaviour by dressage horses was investigated byKienapfel et al (2014). Conflict behaviours recorded were tail swishing, ears fixed back, head tossing, mouth wide open, showing teeth, abnormal oral behaviour, nose tilting, going-against…”